THE SYSTEMATIC INTEGRATION AND HARMONIZATION OF COMPLEMENTARY PROTECTION IN INTERNATIONAL LAW

Abstract

International Humanitarian Law remains the regulatory bedrock framework that governs armed conflict, even though International Human Rights Law (IRL) increasingly operates in tandem with it in contemporary hostilities. This article analyzes the interlocking protections of the dual frameworks that shield refugees and asylum seekers in theaters of war. Particular focus is on the efficacy of a mutually reinforcing, concurrent, and cumulative application of both spheres of jurisprudence during active military engagements. This article examines the confluence and bifurcation between international Human Rights law and international humanitarian law in safeguarding the rights of displaced populations, non-combatants, and asylum seekers during armed conflict. It analyzes the tripartite legal architecture, which consists of International Human Rights Law, demilitarization conventions, and the customary international humanitarian law principle of distinction in wartime. Beyond these considerations, this paper evaluates the juridical impediments to amplifying and expanding refugee status for novel actors and depicts the doctrinal architecture and design for transitioning former combatants to civilian refugee status. Additionally, this article submits that despite their definite dogmatic parameter and precise ideological demarcations, International Human Rights Law and International Humanitarian Law share a foundational, complementary objective: maximizing human protection during armed conflict.